MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1798981749 · doi:10.37236/999

On the Quantum Chromatic Number of a Graph

2007· article· en· W1798981749 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Peter J‎. Cameron, Ashley Montanaro, Michael Newman, Simone Severini, Andreas Winter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Labeling and Dimension Problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Bristol
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsChromatic scaleDiscrete mathematicsCritical graphWindmill graphFriendship graphGraphClique numberQuantumBrooks' theoremGraph powerLine graphQuantum mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the notion of quantum chromatic number of a graph, which is the minimal number of colours necessary in a protocol in which two separated provers can convince a referee that they have a colouring of the graph.After discussing this notion from first principles, we go on to establish relations with the clique number and orthogonal representations of the graph. We also prove several general facts about this graph parameter and find large separations between the clique number and the quantum chromatic number by looking at random graphs. Finally, we show that there can be no separation between classical and quantum chromatic number if the latter is $2$, nor if it is $3$ in a restricted quantum model; on the other hand, we exhibit a graph on $18$ vertices and $44$ edges with chromatic number $5$ and quantum chromatic number $4$.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Electronic Journal of CombinatoricsSame topicGraph Labeling and Dimension ProblemsFrench-language works237,207